Concrete Plant Compliance Excellence
Manage plant safety, product quality, and BSI Kitemark requirements with digital tools designed for concrete production.
The Challenge
Concrete plants operate under dual pressure: rigorous quality scheme requirements from BSI Kitemark or QSRMC demanding traceability for every load, and safety requirements for batching plant operations, mixer truck fleets, and hazardous material handling. Paper-based systems can't provide the batch traceability that quality schemes require, manage the fleet compliance for O-licenced vehicles, and track the environmental compliance for wash-out and discharge. Problems surface as quality scheme non-conformances, structural failure investigations, or fleet compliance enforcement.
How Assistant Manager Solves Concrete Plants Compliance
Each module is designed to address the specific challenges concrete plants businesses face every day.
Digital Checklist
Concrete operations combine fleet compliance requirements with quality scheme demands - digital checklists ensure both sets of requirements are met with evidence that satisfies DVSA and certification auditors
The Problems
Why This Matters for Concrete Plants
- Mixer truck daily checks are rushed in the yard before drivers head out, with paper forms completed in haste or retrospectively during the day's first delivery
Vehicle defects aren't identified before they affect safety or quality, O-licence compliance is compromised, and you can't prove checks were done before the vehicle left the yard
- Batching plant pre-start checks including weigher calibration verification, mixer condition, and silo levels are completed on paper that can't enforce the sequence or verify completion before batching starts
Production begins with unchecked equipment, affecting product quality and creating safety risks that inspection should have identified
- Drum and chute washing procedures and environmental containment checks are inconsistently completed, with wash-out compliance depending on individual driver conscientiousness
Cement contamination occurs on customer sites, environmental permit conditions are breached at wash-out facilities, and you can't prove proper procedures were followed
The Solution
How Digital Checklist Helps
Digital checklists with GPS and timestamp verification, photo evidence requirements, completion enforcement before work proceeds, and real-time visibility of fleet compliance status
Every vehicle check is verified before departure, batching can't begin until pre-start checks are complete, and wash-out compliance is documented with evidence
Use Cases:
- • Mixer truck daily defect check with photo evidence
- • Batching plant pre-start and calibration verification
- • Silo level checks and stock management
- • Drum washing and environmental containment checks
- • Delivery point site assessment checklists
- • End-of-day vehicle inspection and parking
- • Weekly thorough vehicle examination documentation
Feature Screenshot
Digital Checklist
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Mixer truck daily checks are rushed in the yard before drivers head out, with paper forms completed in haste or retrospectively during the day's first delivery
Real Scenario
"A mixer truck is involved in a collision. DVSA investigation reveals the daily check form was completed at 10am, two hours after the vehicle left the yard. The check didn't actually happen before the journey."
Example 2: Batching plant pre-start checks including weigher calibration verification, mixer condition, and silo levels are completed on paper that can't enforce the sequence or verify completion before batching starts
Real Scenario
"A batch of concrete fails strength testing. Investigation reveals the weigh system was out of calibration, but the pre-start check that should have verified calibration was signed off without actually checking."
Example 3: Drum and chute washing procedures and environmental containment checks are inconsistently completed, with wash-out compliance depending on individual driver conscientiousness
Real Scenario
"A customer complains about cement contamination on their site from drum washing. You can't prove whether proper wash-out procedures were followed because paper records are incomplete."
Staff Training
Concrete plants combine fleet driver compliance with quality scheme operator requirements - training management must satisfy both DVSA and BSI/QSRMC auditors
The Problems
Why This Matters for Concrete Plants
- Driver CPC, ADR (for admixtures), and concrete-specific competencies are tracked on spreadsheets that don't alert when renewals are due and can't prevent non-compliant drivers from operating
Drivers operate without current qualifications, creating O-licence compliance issues and personal liability for transport managers
- Quality scheme requirements for batching plant operator competency and concrete technician qualifications aren't systematically tracked or linked to work authorisation
Personnel without verified competency operate batching systems or conduct quality testing, undermining product quality and certification
- New drivers receive vehicle handover but not proper training on concrete product knowledge, delivery procedures, and quality preservation during transit
Concrete quality degrades during delivery because drivers don't understand the product, leading to rejected loads and customer complaints
The Solution
How Staff Training Helps
Integrated driver and operator training management with qualification tracking, automatic expiry alerts, competency verification before work assignment, and quality scheme compliance documentation
No driver can be assigned without current qualifications, operators can only work on equipment they're assessed for, and quality scheme competency requirements are demonstrable
Use Cases:
- • Driver CPC and licence category tracking
- • ADR qualification management for admixture handling
- • Batching plant operator competency assessment
- • Concrete technician qualification tracking
- • Product knowledge training for drivers
- • Quality scheme-specific training documentation
- • New starter induction with role-specific requirements
- • Annual refresher training scheduling
Feature Screenshot
Staff Training
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Driver CPC, ADR (for admixtures), and concrete-specific competencies are tracked on spreadsheets that don't alert when renewals are due and can't prevent non-compliant drivers from operating
Real Scenario
"A mixer driver's CPC expires unnoticed. He continues driving for three months. When DVSA stop the vehicle, both the driver and transport manager face prosecution. The O-licence is put at risk."
Example 2: Quality scheme requirements for batching plant operator competency and concrete technician qualifications aren't systematically tracked or linked to work authorisation
Real Scenario
"BSI audit reveals your batching plant operator doesn't have the required competency assessment. He was trained years ago but there's no current assessment documentation. A major non-conformance is raised against your Kitemark."
Example 3: New drivers receive vehicle handover but not proper training on concrete product knowledge, delivery procedures, and quality preservation during transit
Real Scenario
"A new driver adds water to concrete to make it easier to discharge, ruining the product specification. He says nobody told him this was prohibited. You have no training record to prove he was instructed on water addition rules."
Safe Supplier
Concrete quality schemes require traceability of all constituents and control of the supply chain - supplier management must demonstrate the control that auditors expect
The Problems
Why This Matters for Concrete Plants
- Cement, aggregate, and admixture suppliers are approved but their quality certifications and test documentation aren't systematically verified against quality scheme requirements
Non-conforming constituents enter production, affecting concrete quality and potentially causing structural issues in completed works
- Pump and placing contractors who handle your concrete aren't verified for competency, and quality issues arising from poor placing are attributed to your product rather than their workmanship
Product reputation suffers from placing failures that aren't your responsibility, and you can't demonstrate proper contractor selection if disputes arise
- Haulage subcontractors used during peak demand aren't verified for O-licence compliance, driver competency, or vehicle standards before they collect your products
Subcontractor compliance failures reflect on your operation, and quality scheme auditors question your supply chain control
The Solution
How Safe Supplier Helps
Quality scheme-compliant supplier management with constituent certification tracking, contractor competency verification, and haulage subcontractor compliance monitoring
Every constituent supplier has verified and current certification, contractors are vetted before working with your products, and subcontractor compliance is monitored continuously
Use Cases:
- • Cement supplier certification and test certificate tracking
- • Aggregate supplier quality documentation verification
- • Admixture supplier compliance and technical data management
- • Pump and placing contractor competency verification
- • Haulage subcontractor O-licence and compliance monitoring
- • Constituent test certificate storage and retrieval
- • Supplier audit and performance monitoring
Feature Screenshot
Safe Supplier
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Cement, aggregate, and admixture suppliers are approved but their quality certifications and test documentation aren't systematically verified against quality scheme requirements
Real Scenario
"Concrete fails specification due to aggregate contamination. Investigation reveals the aggregate supplier's quality certification expired three months ago, but your approved supplier list still showed them as compliant."
Example 2: Pump and placing contractors who handle your concrete aren't verified for competency, and quality issues arising from poor placing are attributed to your product rather than their workmanship
Real Scenario
"A structural slab fails strength tests. The customer blames your concrete, but the actual cause was improper vibration by the placing contractor. You have no documentation of the contractor's competency or your due diligence in selecting them."
Example 3: Haulage subcontractors used during peak demand aren't verified for O-licence compliance, driver competency, or vehicle standards before they collect your products
Real Scenario
"A subcontractor's mixer truck is stopped by DVSA with multiple defects while carrying your product. The reputational damage and regulatory questions about your supply chain oversight are significant."
Action Tracker
Concrete operations receive requirements from quality scheme auditors, customers, fleet compliance, and internal audits - unified tracking prevents actions being lost between departments
The Problems
Why This Matters for Concrete Plants
- Quality scheme audit non-conformances generate corrective action requirements that are tracked in the audit report but not systematically managed to completion
Non-conformances remain open, surveillance audits identify the same issues, and certification is put at risk by repeated failures to close actions
- Customer quality complaints generate investigation and corrective action requirements that are handled case-by-case without systematic tracking of whether actions were completed and effective
The same quality issues recur because corrective actions weren't properly implemented, damaging customer relationships and product reputation
- Vehicle defects, plant maintenance requirements, and compliance issues from various sources are assigned but not tracked in a unified system, leading to gaps and duplications
Some actions are completed multiple times while others fall between responsibilities and are never addressed
The Solution
How Action Tracker Helps
Unified action tracking for quality scheme non-conformances, customer complaints, and operational issues with assignees, due dates, evidence requirements, and verification of effectiveness
Every action from every source is tracked in one system, completion is verified with evidence, and effectiveness is assessed before actions are closed
Use Cases:
- • Quality scheme non-conformance corrective action tracking
- • Customer complaint investigation and resolution management
- • Vehicle defect repair tracking and verification
- • Plant maintenance action scheduling and completion
- • Calibration non-conformance corrective action
- • Internal audit finding closure
- • Regulatory compliance action management
Feature Screenshot
Action Tracker
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Quality scheme audit non-conformances generate corrective action requirements that are tracked in the audit report but not systematically managed to completion
Real Scenario
"BSI Kitemark audit raises three non-conformances. Two are addressed before the follow-up, but one is forgotten. The next audit finds the same issue still open, questioning your management commitment."
Example 2: Customer quality complaints generate investigation and corrective action requirements that are handled case-by-case without systematic tracking of whether actions were completed and effective
Real Scenario
"A major customer receives three deliveries with workability issues in a row. Each complaint generated corrective action commitments, but nobody tracked whether the actions were completed. The customer terminates the contract."
Example 3: Vehicle defects, plant maintenance requirements, and compliance issues from various sources are assigned but not tracked in a unified system, leading to gaps and duplications
Real Scenario
"A vehicle defect is reported to both maintenance and the transport manager. Both think the other is handling it. The vehicle continues operating with the defect until a more serious failure occurs."
Document Vault
Concrete operations need document control that satisfies quality scheme requirements for product traceability and fleet requirements for O-licence compliance - one system serving both needs
The Problems
Why This Matters for Concrete Plants
- Mix designs, constituent specifications, and quality scheme documentation are scattered across office systems, laboratory files, and personal drives with no central controlled repository
Mix designs used in production may not match the approved versions, quality scheme audits reveal document control failures, and traceability is compromised
- Delivery tickets, cube test results, and batch records are filed by date but not linked together, making it impossible to quickly retrieve all documentation for a specific delivery when disputes arise
When structural issues emerge months or years later, you can't quickly retrieve the complete documentation package needed to defend your product
- Fleet documentation including O-licence, vehicle registrations, insurance, and maintenance records are managed separately from quality documentation with no unified compliance view
Fleet compliance gaps aren't visible until DVSA enforcement, and transport managers can't quickly demonstrate compliance status
The Solution
How Document Vault Helps
Unified document management linking mix designs to batches to deliveries to test results, plus fleet documentation with O-licence compliance tracking
Complete traceability from mix design to placed concrete, instant retrieval of all documentation for any delivery, and fleet compliance visible at a glance
Use Cases:
- • Mix design controlled document management
- • Constituent specification and approval storage
- • Batch record archive with linked delivery tickets
- • Cube test result storage with batch traceability
- • O-licence documentation and compliance tracking
- • Vehicle registration and insurance document management
- • Maintenance record storage and retrieval
Feature Screenshot
Document Vault
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Mix designs, constituent specifications, and quality scheme documentation are scattered across office systems, laboratory files, and personal drives with no central controlled repository
Real Scenario
"BSI auditor requests the approved mix design for a product. Three different versions are produced from three locations. The auditor raises a major non-conformance for document control failure."
Example 2: Delivery tickets, cube test results, and batch records are filed by date but not linked together, making it impossible to quickly retrieve all documentation for a specific delivery when disputes arise
Real Scenario
"A structural engineer questions concrete quality in a building three years after placement. You need delivery tickets, batch records, and cube test results. They're in different filing systems and some can't be found."
Example 3: Fleet documentation including O-licence, vehicle registrations, insurance, and maintenance records are managed separately from quality documentation with no unified compliance view
Real Scenario
"DVSA conduct an O-licence audit requesting documentation for ten vehicles. Your records are scattered across maintenance systems, insurance files, and the office. The audit takes two days instead of two hours."
Incident Reports
Concrete operations have incidents spanning fleet safety, product quality, and customer site activities - unified reporting prevents gaps and reveals patterns that wouldn't be visible in siloed systems
The Problems
Why This Matters for Concrete Plants
- Quality non-conformances, rejected loads, and customer complaints are handled case-by-case without systematic capture that allows trend analysis and pattern identification
Recurring quality issues aren't identified because incidents aren't analysed together, and quality scheme auditors question your approach to continuous improvement
- Vehicle incidents, driver accidents, and delivery site injuries are reported to different people without a unified system that captures all incidents for trend analysis and RIDDOR determination
Incidents fall between safety and fleet responsibilities, trends aren't identified across incident types, and RIDDOR reporting may be missed
- Near-misses during deliveries - access issues, placement problems, pump failures - go unreported because drivers prioritise completing deliveries over documentation
Warning signs before serious incidents or quality failures aren't captured, and opportunities to prevent recurrence are lost
The Solution
How Incident Reports Helps
Unified incident reporting for safety and quality events with mobile capture for drivers, trend analysis across incident types, and RIDDOR determination guidance
Every incident is captured regardless of type, trends are visible across safety and quality events, and RIDDOR requirements are correctly identified
Use Cases:
- • Quality non-conformance and rejection reporting
- • Customer complaint capture and investigation
- • Vehicle incident and collision reporting
- • Driver and delivery site injury documentation
- • Near-miss reporting for fleet and quality events
- • RIDDOR determination and notification tracking
- • Trend analysis across safety and quality incidents
Feature Screenshot
Incident Reports
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Quality non-conformances, rejected loads, and customer complaints are handled case-by-case without systematic capture that allows trend analysis and pattern identification
Real Scenario
"Quality scheme audit asks to see your quality incident trends. You can list individual complaints but can't analyse patterns because incidents were handled reactively without systematic capture."
Example 2: Vehicle incidents, driver accidents, and delivery site injuries are reported to different people without a unified system that captures all incidents for trend analysis and RIDDOR determination
Real Scenario
"A driver is injured on a customer site. The customer reports to their safety team, your driver reports to the transport manager. Nobody captures it in the safety incident system and RIDDOR reporting is missed."
Example 3: Near-misses during deliveries - access issues, placement problems, pump failures - go unreported because drivers prioritise completing deliveries over documentation
Real Scenario
"Concrete is placed in difficult access that the pump can barely reach. The driver doesn't report the issue. The next delivery to the same site results in a placement failure and rejected concrete."
Audit Trail
Concrete operations face scrutiny from structural engineers, quality scheme auditors, and fleet enforcement - audit trails must satisfy all these stakeholders that data is authentic and unmodified
The Problems
Why This Matters for Concrete Plants
- Batch records and mix data are generated by the batching system but can't prove the data hasn't been modified after the fact when disputes arise
When structural issues emerge and batch data is questioned, you can't prove the data represents what was actually batched rather than modified records
- Vehicle check completions, driver tachograph records, and delivery documentation exist in separate systems that can't prove the sequence and timing of activities
DVSA enforcement questions whether checks were done before journeys, whether driving hours are accurate, and whether delivery sequences match tachograph data
- Cube test results are recorded on laboratory sheets that could theoretically be modified or created retrospectively, undermining confidence in quality data
Customers and quality scheme auditors question test result integrity, and disputes over concrete quality become difficult to resolve
The Solution
How Audit Trail Helps
Tamper-proof audit trails for batch data, vehicle activities, and quality testing with automatic timestamps, user identification, and data integrity verification
Batch records are provably authentic, vehicle activities have irrefutable timing evidence, and quality test data integrity is demonstrable
Use Cases:
- • Batch record integrity verification
- • Vehicle check timing and completion audit trails
- • Delivery documentation timestamp verification
- • Cube test result data integrity
- • Driver hours and tachograph reconciliation
- • Mix design change tracking and approval history
- • Quality scheme evidence trail for certification
Feature Screenshot
Audit Trail
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Batch records and mix data are generated by the batching system but can't prove the data hasn't been modified after the fact when disputes arise
Real Scenario
"Concrete in a structure fails. The contractor claims your batch records have been altered to hide a batching error. Without tamper-proof audit trails, you can't prove the records are authentic."
Example 2: Vehicle check completions, driver tachograph records, and delivery documentation exist in separate systems that can't prove the sequence and timing of activities
Real Scenario
"DVSA audit compares your delivery tickets to tachograph data and finds discrepancies. Without integrated audit trails, you can't explain the differences or prove compliance."
Example 3: Cube test results are recorded on laboratory sheets that could theoretically be modified or created retrospectively, undermining confidence in quality data
Real Scenario
"A customer's independent testing contradicts your cube test results. They suggest your results may have been manipulated. Without timestamp verification, you can't prove when testing actually occurred."
Temperature Monitoring
Concrete quality depends on temperature control, and specifications increasingly require verified temperature monitoring - systematic monitoring satisfies quality requirements and environmental permits
The Problems
Why This Matters for Concrete Plants
- Concrete temperature at delivery is recorded manually on delivery tickets, but there's no verification that readings are accurate or taken at the point of discharge
Temperature data doesn't reliably reflect actual concrete condition at placement, and specifications requiring temperature limits can't be verified
- Constituent temperatures - aggregate stockpiles, cement silos, and water supply - aren't monitored systematically, making it difficult to control concrete temperature in extreme weather
Hot or cold weather produces concrete outside temperature specifications because constituent temperatures weren't managed
- Environmental temperature monitoring required for wash-out facilities and water discharge isn't linked to permit conditions, and exceedances aren't automatically identified
Permit breaches occur because monitoring isn't tied to the actual permit limits, and corrective action isn't triggered until regulators identify the problem
The Solution
How Temperature Monitoring Helps
Integrated temperature monitoring for concrete, constituents, and environmental compliance with automatic limit alerts, trend analysis, and regulatory reporting support
Concrete temperature is verified at discharge, constituent temperatures are monitored to control mix temperature, and environmental parameters are tracked against permit limits
Use Cases:
- • Concrete temperature verification at discharge with timestamp
- • Aggregate stockpile temperature monitoring
- • Cement silo temperature tracking
- • Mixing water temperature control
- • Wash-out water temperature and pH monitoring
- • Ambient temperature logging for production context
- • Permit limit compliance alerts and reporting
Feature Screenshot
Temperature Monitoring
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Concrete temperature at delivery is recorded manually on delivery tickets, but there's no verification that readings are accurate or taken at the point of discharge
Real Scenario
"A specification requires concrete to be placed below 30C. Your delivery tickets show compliant temperatures, but the customer's independent measurement shows exceedances. Without verified monitoring, disputes arise."
Example 2: Constituent temperatures - aggregate stockpiles, cement silos, and water supply - aren't monitored systematically, making it difficult to control concrete temperature in extreme weather
Real Scenario
"During a summer heatwave, concrete consistently exceeds temperature specifications. You can't control the problem because you don't know which constituent is causing the issue."
Example 3: Environmental temperature monitoring required for wash-out facilities and water discharge isn't linked to permit conditions, and exceedances aren't automatically identified
Real Scenario
"Your wash-out water discharge exceeds pH limits during winter. Your monitoring shows the readings, but nobody connected them to the permit limit. Environment Agency discover the ongoing breach during their audit."
Results Concrete Plants Businesses Achieve
Other Mining & Quarrying Solutions
Set Your Compliance in Concrete
Join concrete producers using Assistant Manager to maintain quality excellence and customer confidence.